Dispensationalist Christian Zionism and the
Shaping of US Policy Towards Israel-Palestine

By Rammy M. Haija

Abstract
This article investigates the history of
contemporary Christian Zionism in the United States
and the impact of this movement on US policy issues
related to Israel-Palestine.DispensationalistChristian Zionists, often described the 'Armageddon
lobby', make up the largest voting bloc in the
Republican Party and have become a mainstay in US
politics. More recently, the Christian Zionist lobby
has had a profoundly damaging impact on the
Israeli-Palestinian 'peace process' as well as
creating a conspiracy of silence regarding Israeli
offensives in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Though the 'Armageddon lobby' has been successful in
its efforts as a pro-Israel lobby, its influence is
in fact counterproductive to Israel because the
lobby hinders the prospect of Israel living in peace
because of their policy of deterring the progression
of negotiations.

1. Introduction to Christian Zionism

While the alliance between America's
Christian Zionists and the pro-Israel lobby has been in
existence for decades now, more recently it has become
critical to examine this dynamic relationship because of the
current volatile state resulting from the current
Palestinian Intifada (uprising). With nearly 10 per cent of
US voters declaring themselves as Zionist or
dispensationalist Christians, and another 35 per cent
constituting mainstream Christianity, the Christian Zionist
lobby has targeted both voting pools for its purpose of
assembling a pro-Israel constituency among American voters
through the promotion of biblical and dispensationalist
doctrine.

There are many names and titles for the Christian
Zionists in the United States. Some call them the
'Armageddon Lobby', others have referred to them as the
'Christian AIPAC'. These nicknames are minor examples of the
motives and unconditional support for Israel among the
Christian-Right, which have made it an instrumental actor in
a pro-US policy towards Israel. This position has been
especially solidified among the powerful elites in US
policy. An article published in Time magazine
following the aftermath of the Israeli Defense Force's
infamous incursions into the West Bank in 2002 states:
'Today the most influential lobbying on behalf of Israel is
being done by a group not usually seen as an ally of the
largely Democratic Jewish community: Evangelical Christians'
(Ratnesar 2002: 26).

In the late 1970s, Israel was desperately trying to
improve its image in the international arena, but wanted to
do this without yielding much in the way of territorial or
political concessions. Israel had drawn a large amount of
international support by its participation in the Camp David
Peace Accords with Egypt in 1978. However, the State was
still experiencing a negative international disposition from
the 1975 United Nations Resolution 3379 that concluded:
'Zionism is a form of racism and discrimination' (United
Nations 1975: 84). It was also around this same time that
the formal Christian-Right was established and Jewish
organisations began understanding that an alliance with the
Christian Zionists in the US could bolster their image and
prominence on the international level through a stronger
influence in US politics.

The fervency of the Christian-Right towards the State of
Israel coupled with its strong American presence captured
the attention of Israeli interest groups. Though aware of
their diametric social and religious views, Jewish political
organisations saw an alliance with the Christian Zionists as
a crucial element in promoting a positive image of Israel in
US politics and among the American mainstream.
Jewish-American leaders were initially opposed to an
alliance with the Christian-Right and perceived the movement
as a possible adversary (Brownfield 2002: 71). However, when
the formal establishment of the Christian-Right solidified
this movement as an influential political bloc in the US,
these feelings of trepidation were soon dissipated and
Israeli groups recognised that an alliance with this bloc
would be advantageous to their political interests.

2. Formal
Establishment of the Alliance

In the late 1970s, there was a growing
unrest among conservative Christians in the US over the lack
of political mobilisation of their constituency. They felt
that their agendas could be better applied if there was a
recognised body from which they were proposed. Thus, in
1979, Reverend Jerry Falwell launched an organisation known
as the Moral Majority with the aim 'to mobilize the
Christian church on behalf of moral and social issues and to
encourage participation by people of faith in the political
process'.2 The
Moral Majority quickly became a household name. Through its
charismatic public leader, the organisation mobilised
thousands of churches and millions of registered voters to
form a Christian political bloc, and what is now known as
the Christian-Right.

When political strategists began studying the importance
of the Christian-Right to American politics, it was found
that this group was the largest social movement in the US,
and comprised the largest voting bloc within the Republican
Party (Berlet and Hardisty 2003). On an Israeli-sponsored
visit to the Holy Land in 1979, reacting to a growing Jewish
settlement near the Palestinian town of Nablus, Falwell
declared, 'God had been good to America because America had
been good to the Jews' (Brownfield 2002: 71). Falwell's
fervour was genuine, but these Israeli-sponsored visits were
strategic. Israel viewed the Moral Majority's constituency
as an added dimension for promoting Israeli interests to the
US government.

Only a few months after the establishment of the Moral
Majority, Falwell and long-time evangelist Billy Graham were
formally invited to a gala dinner in New York City by then
Likud leader and Israeli Prime Minister Menahem Begin. The
occasion was the presentation of the Jabotinsky Centennial
Medal, named after Vladimir Jabotinsky, the right-wing
Zionist leader. The medal is awarded by the State of Israel
to a person who is considered a lifetime friend of the
nation (Anderson 2002: 77). That year, the inaugural medals
were awarded to Jerry Falwell and Billy Graham,
acknowledging the two as long-time staunch supporters of
Israel. It is upon this awarding that we conclude that the
formal alliance between the Christian-Right and Israel had
begun.

Oddly, during this inaugural awarding, reports surfaced
that Falwell had been given a Learjet by Israeli Prime
Minister Begin on behalf of the State of Israel to show
appreciation for Falwell's fervent support of the nation.
The late author Grace Halsell wrote extensively on the Moral
Majority, and in one interview she stated:

I did document the fact that Israel had
given Jerry Falwell a jet airplane, which is a nice
gift. He uses it to go around and he uses that jet,
politically, I would say. I personally heard Jerry
Falwell thank Israeli leader Moshe Arens3
when I was traveling with Falwell. He didn't know I was
writing a book, but I traveled with two of his
delegations that went to Israel.

(Halsell 2000)

The Jabotinsky Centennial Medal, as well
as the Learjet, created a strong relationship between Begin
and Falwell, which later became useful to the Israeli Prime
Minister. When Israel unilaterally bombed Iraq's nuclear
reactor in 1981, Begin immediately called Jerry Falwell and
requested that the Evangelist rally American Christian
support for Israel's unilateral action (Brownfield 2002:
71).

Falwell used his organisation as a conduit for promoting
support for Israel's political interests and, in 1985, an
organisation associated with the Moral Majority, known as
the National Christian Leadership Conference for Israel (NCLCI),
organised by Franklin Littell, spearheaded the campaign to
repeal UN Resolution 3379.4

3. Early
Achievements of the Christian-Right

Littell was one of the original founders
of the contemporary Israel-first ideology that Falwell came
to embrace. In the 1950s and early 1960s when France was
Israel's strongest ally and chief weapons provider, Littell
became concerned for the State. It was widely-known that the
relationship France maintained with Israel was out of a
strategic interest of retaining control over the Suez Canal
in Egypt (Chaya 2004). Littell believed that for the
security of the State of Israel there needed to be an
unconditional alliance, one based not on political
motivations, but with a religious foundation. Littell used
his influence as a Christian leader to dedicate a career to
supporting the State of Israel and developing this
unconditional alliance. Shortly after the Six-Day War in
June of 1967, Littell established Christians Concerned for
Israel (CCI), an organisation designed 'to reactivate the
pro-Israel spirit in the mainline Protestant churches'.5
At that time, Littell and his organisation were only a small
minority. There was increased support for the Palestinian
cause in the mainline Protestant and Catholic churches,
particularly among the leadership. Littell viewed this as a
threat to Israel and sought the expansion of the CCI to help
curtail this growing trend.

Littell's mobilisations proved to be successful on two
issues that were critical for Israel. In both efforts
Littell was a major player in creating a verdict in Israel's
favour. The first came in 1978 when the US was considering
the sale of F-15s and other reconnaissance equipment to its
Middle East ally, Saudi Arabia. Israel and the Israeli lobby
in the US applied heavy [End Page 78] pressure on
Congress and President Jimmy Carter's administration to
withdraw the sale commitment. Israel's persistent efforts,
however, did not pay off until Littell helped organise a
considerable number of Christians to head to Washington D.C.
and call on the Carter Administration to block the sale.
Their efforts were successful and the US withdrew its offer
to sell the reconnaissance planes and equipment.

The second issue came about during the mobilisation in
Washington against the sale of AWACS to the Saudis.
According to David Blewett,6
there was '[an] unexpectedly large turnout of concerned
Christians and Christian groups, several of whom had never
heard of one another, [which] led to the organisation of the
NCLCI, with the CCI membership as its nucleus'. The NCLCI,
which Littell helped organise, was instrumental in promoting
the Christian-Right campaign to repeal UN Resolution 3379.
While the initial call for action against UN Resolution 3379
came from the NCLCI, it was echoed by Falwell and other
leaders in the Moral Majority, and this brought great
notoriety to the issue.

UN Resolution 3379 was initially introduced at the
Conference of Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned
Countries in Lima, Peru, in August of 1975 (United Nations
1975: 84). After this resolution was endorsed at the
conference, it was proposed before the UN General Assembly
two months later. The entire scope of the resolution was not
centrally focused on Israel. Only the final nine words of
this 450-word resolution were directed towards Israel. The
resolution was intended to reprimand all forms of racism and
discrimination on the part of UN member nations. Christian
Zionists were strongly opposed to UN Resolution 3379 but
after the Third Committee in the UN General Assembly adopted
it, Israeli efforts to overturn it appeared as though they
would be futile.

The adoption of this resolution was followed by a
long-standing effort by Israeli lobby groups requesting the
US to exert pressure on the UN. However, these efforts were
ineffective. When the Christian-Right lobby joined the
effort, officials in Washington began responding to the
pressure. Christian-Right organisations called on their
constituents to write to their members of Congress and ask
them to support the repeal of the resolution. There was a
strong campaign against the resolution at the 1985 Feast of
the Tabernacles.7
Those in attendance were given pamphlets, entitled 'Danger
at the UN', which attacked the resolution as being not only
anti-Zionist but anti-Semitic as well.

On 23 January 1990 a group of Congressional
representatives proposed House Resolution 457 that called on
the UN to repeal Resolution 3379. [End Page 79] House
Resolution 457 stated that 'Zionism is a national movement
of the Jewish people for self-determination, a legitimate
and moral aspiration characteristic of many national groups
in the modern world. [United] Nations General Assembly
Resolution 3379 has had as its overt purpose the
delegitimation of the State of Israel'.8
The US President during the time, George H.W. Bush,
supported the House resolution and it was passed. On 3 May
1990 a similar resolution, Senate Joint Resolution 246, was
proposed by Senator George Mitchell and adopted unanimously.9
The efforts towards repealing UN Resolution 3379 would prove
to be fruitful as the resolution condemning Zionism was
overturned in 1991. US pressure to repeal the resolution was
likely the key factor in the repeal of UN Resolution 3379,
because historically UN resolutions are rarely repealed. It
may be argued that the Christian Zionists rather than
Congress deserve the credit for repealing the resolution.

4. Theology of
Apocalyptic Dispensationalism

There are two common approaches by which
Christian Zionists usually justify support for 'Eretz
Yisrael' (Land of Israel) and its 'people'. First is the
belief found in the Book of Genesis 12:3, which states, 'I
will bless those who bless you, whoever curses you I will
curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through
you'. Based on this verse, many non-dispensationalist
Christians feel compelled to embrace Israel as a premise of
faith and as an assurance that blessings will be bestowed on
those who ideologically and financially bless the 'chosen
people'. This argument has produced much disagreement from
both Christians and non-Christians. Some Christian scholars
argue that Jews have arrogantly misinterpreted the context
of this verse and Christian Zionists have ignorantly
accepted it.

Old Testament scholars express grave concern with the
misinterpretations of the Bible by Christians and Jews alike
(Domb 1989; Beck 1991). Rabbi Domb believes that the State
of Israel was established without the blessings of God
because it was established by force, and the Torah tells its
believers 'not to ascend to the Holy Land as a group using
force' as is written in Tractate Kesubos 111a (Domb 1989).
Christian Zionists have accepted Genesis 12:3 as a message
from God delivered to the Jewish people in Old Testament
time. Thus, Christian Zionists have embraced this literally
as a premise of faith that has God promising to bless those
who blessed his 'chosen people' (Anderson 2002).

The second approach to the subscription of Zionist
ideology is 'based on dispensationalist theology', which
states that we are living in the last [End Page 80]
dispensation of the Book of Revelation, which essentially
means that we are in the end-times. Within this theology,
the return of the Messiah is contingent upon a set of events
transpiring, and among these, a Jewish State of Israel must
be in existence.

The dispensationalist theology is the guiding ideology
for the Christian Zionist movement. According to Tony
Campolo, the creation of dispensationalist theology can be
credited to a nineteenth-century Anglican priest from
Plymouth, England, named John Nelson Darby. Though Darby
remains a little known historical theologian, his theology
has permeated much of the Christian-Right movement of today.
As Campolo writes, 'without understanding dispensationalism,
however, it is almost impossible to understand how Christian
Zionism has come to dominate American Evangelicalism and
been so influential on the course of US Middle East policy'
(Campolo 2005: 19).

While it was Darby who is credited with the creation of
dispensationalist theology, it was another man, Cyrus
Ingerson Scofield, who is credited with spreading
dispensationalist theology in the nineteenth century. In
1909, Scofield published a study Bible, Scofield
Reference Bible, and this is the source that was used by
early dispensationalists to promote dispensationalist
theology (Scofield 1909). In fact it was that Bible which,
according to Campolo, became 'by far the most popular study
Bible ever published' (Campolo 2005: 19). The study of
dispensationalist theology is often referred to as
Scofieldism, and many scholars argue that Scofieldism is
incorrectly described as a biblical theology when rather it
should be thought of as a political theology. '[Scofieldism]
is highly political and it gets so that it controls what
goes on in the White House and controls what goes on in
Congress. It's a vast number of Christians who are
influencing Congress and the President' (Halsell 2000).

4.1 Teaching of the 'Rapture'

One of the fundamental teachings of
Scofield was the theology of the 'rapture'. The 'rapture'
refers to the dispensationalist belief that prior to the
coming of the Messiah, God will remove all of his true
believers from earth, and this will take place either
before, after, or during the reign of the anti-Christ.
Dispensationalists believe that this will occur without
warning, and all of God's true followers will vanish in an
instant and their souls will ascend to heaven while all of
those who are non-believers will be 'left behind'. Scofield
was known to preach often about the 'rapture' in his
sermons, and told his listeners that the present scenario
was ripe for a 'rapturing' and that the followers of Christ
should welcome this final catastrophe to the world because
they would be taken to their father before the world's great
suffering would begin (Brownfield 2002: 72).

The dispensationalist theology promoted by Darby and
Scofield has [End Page 81] evolved since its
inception and for this study the type of dispensationalism
we will assess is 'premillennial dispensationalism' or
'progressive dispensationalism'. Currently, this is the most
widely accepted form of dispensationalism. It holds that
Christ will return prior to a literal end-times millennium
(Wagner 2003). Progressive dispensationalism, which
originated in the mid-1980s, sees more continuity between
Israel and Evangelical Christians than the other two
variations of dispensationalism. Progressive
dispensationalism stresses that both Israel and Evangelical
Christians comprise the 'people of God' and both are related
to the blessings of the New Covenant. It is also important
to realise that this definition of dispensationalism was
revised in the mid-1980s, which is around the same time that
the Christian-Right and Israel created a formal alliance.

This redefining of dispensationalism was likely done to
soften the language used by earlier dispensationalists,
which founded their 'rapture' belief on the destruction of
the Holy Land and the catastrophic death of a large portion
of Israel's Jewish population. (Campolo 2005). Despite the
spiritual equality between Christians and Jews as defined by
progressive dispensationalists, there still remain
functional distinctions between the groups. Progressive
dispensationalists do not equate the church as the State of
Israel in this age, and they still see a future distinct
identity and function for ethnic Israel in the coming
millennial kingdom (Ryrie 1994: 20).

Dr Stephen R. Sizer, a noted scholar and critic on
Christian Zionism, describes this unflinching belief of
decoded biblical context as a 'literalist approach to
biblical hermeneutics'.10
He explains that Darby along with contemporary apocalyptic
Christian Zionists such as Hal Lindsey have '[developed]
erroneous views concerning Israel [on the basis of] an
allegorical, non-literal hermeneutic'.11
It is this specific 'decoding' of biblical context that has
promoted the theology of dispensationalism and influenced
Christian Zionists to give unconditional support to the
State of Israel. Lindsey's writings refer to Old Testament
predictions made by Daniel, which suggest that in the time
just before the return of the Messiah, the knowledge of the
species of man would grow immensely and the secrets of the
universe would begin to reveal themselves through this
greater knowledge. Lindsey (1997) suggests that this time of
great knowledge is now, and through careful study of the
Bible's clues, Lindsey believes that he has deciphered the
hints of the fate of mankind and the fate of the earth.

Dispensationalist theology has seen a great revival among
mainstream Christians in the US due mostly to the current
state of volatility in the Middle East, which many believe
is a prerequisite for the return of the [End Page 82]
Messiah. While America's mainstream Christians are unable to
recognise the dispensationalist theology by name, this
theology has found its way into mainstream Christian homes
in an inconspicuous manner. The dispensationalist theory has
seen growth among mainstream Christians who have been
convinced of this theology through the best selling novel
series Left Behind and other popular literature
pertaining to dispensationalist theology. Books with
dispensationalist themes are having a great impact on
American political thought. In a review of the Left
Behind series, Gershom Gorenberg writes: 'The Left
Behind books are giving millions of people an
interpretive paradigm in which extreme views seem sensible.
Propaganda in the guise of fiction, they demand our
attention' (Gorenberg 2002: 45). The Left Behind
series is the most popular example of contemporary
dispensationalism, and the Left Behind authors, Tim
LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins (1996), are self-described
dispensationalist Christian Zionists. The Left Behind
series depicts scenarios of the 'rapture' and all of the
chaos that ensues once the true believers of Christ have
absconded to heaven and the remaining non-believers are left
on earth. Though the books are classified as fiction,
readers of this series are actually being taught the
theologies of dispensationalism in a very subtle manner.

Dispensationalists believe that the initial 'rapture'
will be followed by three-and-a-half years of pseudo-peace,
referred to as the 'Abomination of Desolation', and is
symbolically described as a ram and a goat in Daniel 8.
Daniel 8:13-14 describes the message revealed to Daniel:
'Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said
to him, 'How long will it take for the vision to be
fulfilled the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, the
rebellion that causes desolation, and the surrender of the
sanctuary and of the host that will be trampled underfoot?'
He said to me, 'It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings;
then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated' (Daniel 8:13-14).
Of the three and a half years following the 'Abomination of
Desolation' dispensationalists believe that this will be a
time of many wars, famine and disease. This three-and-a-half
year period following the 'Abomination of Desolation' is
referred to as the 'Great Tribulation'.12
During the 'Great Tribulation' dispensationalists believe
that the earth will be completely overtaken by the
anti-Christ. In Revelation 13 this beast will declare the
number '666' and assign in to all peoples.

Dispensationalists believe that the anti-Christ will have
immense world popularity and all those who oppose him will
be ostracised from their societies. A simple Google query of
the 'Abomination of Desolation' reveals 71,500 hits on the
subject.13
Some of these are personal homepages describing this period
as a likely preparation for nuclear war or world
annihilation. This [End Page 83] dispensationalist
theology has not only become a personal belief, but also a
matter of political undertaking for some Christian Zionists.

It is during the 'Great Tribulation' that
dispensationalists believe that 144,000 Jews will convert to
Christianity and this conversion will reveal to them the
true intentions of the anti-Christ. Thus, these 144,000
converted Jews will become the epicentre of proselytising
the Christian faith to all non-believers who were not
'raptured'. These 144,000 converted Jews will meet the
anti-Christ for the final battle known as Armageddon, and
the converted Jews will single-handedly defeat the
anti-Christ (Campolo 2005). It is after this battle that the
seven years of tribulation will conclude and upon this Jesus
will return to defeat and imprison Satan and establish a
Messianic Kingdom on earth for a period of one millennium.

Hal Lindsey, the noted dispensationalist, has written
several books on the topic of dispensationalism. Lindsey's
trademark is his use of current political situations to
explain how the final days would unfold. One particular book
written by Lindsey in 1970 was especially explicit in
linking contemporary events to the end-times. In the
best-seller, The Late Great Planet Earth, he
discusses how the European Economic Community (EEC)
represented the 10-headed beast referred to in the Book of
Revelation, and how this 10-headed beast would pave the way
for the anti-Christ to seize political and economic control
of the world. It must have been to Lindsey's dismay when the
EEC formed a partnership with the European Free Trade
Association (EFTA) and later coalesced into the 27-member
European Union of today.14
Lindsey made several other errant predictions, such as his
assertion that biblical coding has revealed that the
'rapture' would follow once Israel had been a nation for 40
years (Lindsey 1970). The 40-year mark of 1988 came and
passed and 17 years later there has yet to be any documented
mass disappearances attributed to a 'rapture'. Moreover,
even Lindsey's often-erroneous predictions of the final days
have not hurt his credibility, he still retains a steady
group of dispensationalist followers through his books and
television shows aired on the dispensationalist station,
Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN).

5. Christian
Zionism on the Wrong Track

The position among Christian Zionists is
so uncompromising that even when Israelis themselves have
suggested certain concessions be made on specific matters,
Christian Zionists have appealed with fury. A poll conducted
in late 2002 by one of Israel's foremost pollsters, Dr Mina
Zenach, revealed that a vast majority of Israelis are in
favour of unilateral withdrawal of 'all' or 'most of' the
settlements in the Palestinian territories and support the
[End Page 84] establishment of a Palestinian state.15
However, Christian Zionists seem proudly to ignore the
desires of the Israeli majority, and discount reports such
as a recently released study by the Methodist Church in
Great Britain which concluded that an overwhelming majority
of Palestinians 'earnestly desire a just peace with Israel'.16

During the inaugural Christian Zionist Congress (CZC)
conference held in Jerusalem in 1985, the convention
featured both Christians and Jews. In one meeting there was
a motion for a resolution calling on all Jews living outside
of Israel to move to the State. Christians in attendance
were unsatisfied with this motion and added that Israel must
also annex the West Bank. Regarding this statement, an
Israeli Jewish man suggested that this language be modified
to a more moderate tone. Referring to an Israeli poll, the
Jewish man stated that a third of Israel's citizens would
favour returning the West Bank to the Palestinians in
exchange for peace. In response to his suggestion, the
spokesperson for the International Christian Embassy
Jerusalem (ICEJ) angrily replied, 'We don't care what the
Israelis vote! We care what God says, and God gave that land
to the Jews!' (Halsell 1986). Despite the suggestion by the
Israeli Jew of exchanging land for peace, the resolution
calling for an annexation of the West Bank passed
unanimously among the Christian voters at the conference.

In his book Anxious for Armageddon, Professor
Donald Wagner describes personal experience of the
exploitation of the Christian Zionist groups by the
leadership of the Israeli government (Wagner 1995). Wagner
also notes that while Jewish groups in the US and Israel
vehemently oppose any sort of religious alliance with the
Christian Zionists, they have accepted a political alliance
with the movement because it creates another strong-arm for
Israeli interests within US policy. Jewish political affairs
committees as well as the Israeli leadership have contended
that while they may disagree with the motives of Christian
Zionists, their support on behalf of Israeli interests is
welcomed. Jewish leaders such as Anti-Defamation League
(ADL) director Abraham Foxman have stated that the Jewish
leadership welcomes the support of Christian Zionists
despite their disastrous prophecies concerning the Jewish
people, 'as long as it does not come with conditions'
(Foster 2003).

5.1 Christian Zionist Counter
Groups

Some Christian leaders have formed
ecumenical counter-Zionist organisations in response to
their opposition to Christian Zionism. These [End Page
85] organisations, such as Sabeel in Jerusalem, have
established annual conferences in Jerusalem and in the US as
well as web sites, such as Challenging Christian Zionism,
to give people an alternative view of biblical
interpretations of Zionism. These were created because many
in the Christian community became 'disturbed by the growing
influence of Christian Zionism on the political scene in
America, recognizing [Christian Zionism] to be a major
factor in the stalled peace process in the [Holy Land].
[These groups] hope to offer an alternative biblical view,
one that reflects the true nature of God as a God of
compassion and justice'.17
Founder of Sabeel, Canon Naim Ateek presents the Palestinian
Liberation Theological approach to resolving the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, an approach of justice,
advocating non-violence and forgiveness towards the Israeli
occupation (Ateek 2001). Ironically Ateek's adherence to the
Christian principles of non-violence and forgiveness is in
contrast to the policy of Christian Zionist leaders in the
US, such as Falwell and Robertson, who regularly campaign
for increased Israeli aggression towards the Palestinians.

In a response to the annual Christian Zionist gatherings
in Jerusalem, such as the Feast of the Tabernacles
and the Christian Zionist Congress, Sabeel organised
an annual conference in Jerusalem featuring well-known
academics and Palestinian liberation theologians from the
US, Europe, and Palestine, challenging Christian Zionism and
its philosophy. The growing presence of these established
scholars has helped to solidify Sabeel's increasing
influence in the US and Europe. The objective of the
conference is to '[discuss the] modern theological and
political movement that embraces the most extreme
ideological positions of Zionism, thereby becoming
detrimental to a just peace in the [Holy Land]/[This]
movement, with its elevation of modern political Zionism,
provides a worldview where the Gospel is identified with the
ideology of empire, colonialism, and militarism'.18

These organisations that have been established to refute
Zionism are not only made up of Christians but of
Ultra-Orthodox and Reform Jews as well. While criticism of
Christian Zionists by Jews is not widely-publicised, there
have been many instances when Jewish communities in the US
have mobilised and expressed their concern over a growing
dependence on Christian Zionists as well as their scepticism
over whether the alliance has been beneficial to Israel. One
such protest occurred in New York's Central Park in October
2002 and followed with a full-page advertisement published
in the New York Times by an anti-Zionist organisation
called 'Not In Our Name'. This advertisement denounced
Israeli policies and Zionism [End Page 86] and was
endorsed by several well-known Jews such as Susan Sarandon,
Ed Asner, Gloria Steinem, and Tikkun leader Rabbi
Michael Lerner. Christian Zionists responded with hostility
to this position taken by American Jews with one particular
Christian Zionist web site stating:

[On 11 October 2002] the Christian
Coalition rallied for Israel and voiced its support for
the Jewish state in front of the White House. There were
speeches from American and Israeli political leaders,
including the Reverend Pat Robertson, US House Majority
Whip Tom DeLay, and [then] Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert.19
Guess which of these events is setting off alarm bells
for many mainstream liberal American Jews? You got it
the latter one. Yes, the prospect of American Christians
gathering in Washington to express their devotion to
Israel and to demand that the administration do nothing
to harm its interests is very scary to many Jews.20

It is not surprising that Christian
Zionists would be offended by Jews who are ungrateful to
their efforts, but the statement on the Christian Zionist
web site specifically states, 'mainstream liberal American
Jews'. Whether the author realises it, the vast majority of
American Jews would fall into this classification. Most Jews
are aware of the perceived fate that Christians hold for
them, but their influence is too great to decline their
assistance.

However, it is not only liberal mainstream Jews who have
criticised the Christian Zionists but Ultra-Orthodox Jews as
well. An organisation known as Neturei Karta, comprised of
Ultra-Orthodox Jews, regularly protests against the practice
of Zionism. The web site of Neturei Karta states that,

The Neturei Karta are fighting the
changes and inroads made by political Zionism during the
past one-hundred odd years. Guided by the rabbis of our
time and under the inspiring leadership of the late Reb
[Rabbi] Amram Blau, the Neturei Karta refuse to
recognize the right of anyone to establish a "Jewish"
state during the present period of exile.21

According to this organisation, the
practice of Zionism is antithetical to the Torah and these
Ultra-Orthodox rabbis insist that they have 'added nothing
to, nor have they taken anything away from, the written and
oral law of the Torah as it is expressed in the Halacha22
and the Shulchan Aruch'.23
The adherents to this doctrine believe that they are the
true [End Page 87] followers of the Jewish faith, and
Zionism is directly opposed to the law of Judaism because it
promotes a Jewish state at a time when Jews are to remain in
exile.

6. Apocalyptic
Christian Zionism and US Middle East Policies

Dispensationalism is not only popular
among ordinary citizens; it has also achieved an
unprecedented influence today because many of its followers
hold high positions in government. James Watt, Secretary of
the Interior in the Reagan Administration, was one of them.
His expectation of the imminent 'rapture' became his
rationale for exploiting natural resources with little
thought of the future. Watt was thoroughly convinced that
the 'rapture' was at hand. In Tony Campolo's words (2005),

[Watt saw no argument against] drilling
for oil in national parks, eliminating environmental
policies designed to protect the Earth's atmosphere,
rivers, lakes, and oceans. [Watt believed that we should
not] worry about the kind of planet that our
grandchildren will inherit [because] the days for planet
Earth [are] severely limited.

President Ronald Reagan embraced the dispensationalist
theology preached to him by evangelists Jerry Falwell and
Pat Robertson (a Republican presidential candidate in 1988),
and believed that one of his responsibilities was to promote
a military buildup so America would be ready for the battle
of Armageddon (Campolo 2005). According to Tom Valentine,24
'Charles Fischbein, a former high-ranking figure in the
Israeli lobby in America, pointed out that even former
President Reagan and his attorney general, Edwin Meese, were
praying for Armageddon to come during the Reagan era. Reagan
undoubtedly tied in with this idea that there has to be an
Armageddon'. In an intimate phone conversation with AIPAC
director Tom Dine, President Reagan was quoted as saying,
'You know, I turn back to your ancient prophets in the Old
Testament and signs foretelling Armageddon, and I find
myself wondering if - if we're the generation that's going
to see that come about. I don't know if you've noted any of
those prophecies lately, but believe me, they certainly
describe the times we're going through' (Dugger 1984). These
esoteric conversations give evidence that the policy actions
taken by Reagan were consistent with the ideologies of
dispensationalist theology and that Reagan applied this
theology when making policy decisions.

Throughout George W. Bush's first term in office, leaders
in the Christian Zionist community have been assured through
specific incidents that the US administration will
unequivocally support Israel throughout its [End Page 88]
policy decisions. While the Bush Administration may dispute
these claims, these commitments of support are derived from
verbatim public statements made by Christian Zionist leaders
who have met with President Bush, such as Jerry Falwell.
During a 60 Minutes interview in October 2002 Falwell
commented, 'I think now we can count on President Bush to do
the right thing for Israel every time',25
referring to President Bush's actions in April 2002 when he
turned a blind eye as Israel destroyed several West Bank
cities. These statements by Falwell do not bode well for the
US's credibility that it is taking the role of an honest
broker in the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Christian Zionists
have also been overt about their displeasure towards the US
playing an even-handed role, or even purporting to, and want
the US to abandon the idea of a Palestinian state and give
Israel sole sovereignty over the Palestinian territories.

It was also during this interview that Falwell made
inflammatory statements about Islam and the condition of the
Palestinians. Following the interview, the National Council
of Churches (NCC) called on President Bush to condemn the
inflammatory and insensitive statements towards Islam that
Falwell made in the 60 Minutes interview. However,
the White House did not respond to this request and
President Bush did not comment on Falwell's statements.26
Falwell has also stated, 'It is my belief that the Bible
Belt in America is Israel's only safety belt right now/
There are 70 million of us [Evangelical Christians] / And if
there's one thing that brings us together quickly it's
whenever we begin to detect our government becoming a little
anti-Israel'.27
Falwell met with President Bush several times during his
first term in office specifically to discuss the issue of US
support of Israel. According to Falwell, the President's
views on Israel are consistent with those of his own. As the
NCC Resolution states: 'Falwell [has] implied in his
comments that he and his constituency control President
Bush's policies towards Israel and Palestine'.28

Several elected officials have chosen to be outspoken
supporters of Israel based on their Christian faith. In some
cases, this occurs despite the fact that their support for
Israel is inconsistent with the views of their constituency.
This is counter to the 'representative of the people' notion
that we often assume in politics. This is the case of one of
Israel's most outspoken [End Page 89] supporters in
Washington D.C., Texas Republican Tom DeLay. According to
the American Religion Data Archive (ARDA), a survey
conducted in Brazoria County, located in the 22nd
Congressional District of Texas, more citizens in this
district identify themselves as mainline Protestants or
Catholics than Evangelical Christians. However, studies by
Paul Charles Merkley (2001) have revealed that the
hierarchies of the Catholic and Protestant churches have
been vocal opponents of Zionism in the Christian realm. They
have issued countless warnings against Zionism to their
followers through their global organisations such as the
World Council of Churches (WCC), and have concluded that
Christian Zionism and dispensationalism are biblically
erroneous.

6.1 The Impact of Christian
Zionism on US Policies

A first example that substantiates the
profound impact Christian Zionists have on US policy is the
infamous Israeli incursions into the West Bank in April
2002. According to Wagner, these incursions are considered
one of the 'decisive moment[s] in the forging of this
[contemporary] alliance' (Wagner 2003). This contemporary
alliance refers to the close relationship between Israeli
Prime Minster Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush's first-term
administration. Following a Palestinian suicide attack at a
Seder dinner in Israel, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF)
invaded several West Bank cities and proceeded to obliterate
entire neighborhoods of Palestinian cities and towns under
the pretext of rooting out terror.29
International outcries would become deafening at this time,
and most were directed at President Bush and his
administration, which the international community viewed as
the only influence that could halt this destruction.
Responding to international pressure, President Bush made
several appeals to Israeli Prime Minister Sharon to cease
the Israeli actions. While Sharon's response of Israeli
self-defense was expected, the response from the American
Christian-Right in the face of these humanitarian crimes
would be most disheartening. As Wagner wrote (2003):

The Pro-Israel lobby, in coordination
with the Christian-Right, mobilized over 100,000 e-mail
messages, calls and visits urging the President to avoid
restraining Israel. The tactic worked. The president
uttered not another word of criticism or caution, and
Sharon continued the offensive.

Such an occurrence further corroborates
the influence of Christian Zionism and its blind support of
Israel in the name of faith. From mere observation, a visit
to Christian Zionist web sites followed by a visit to far
right-leaning Israeli web sites reveals a remarkable
discovery: rhetoric, links to other columns, accusations,
and praises are nearly identical from [End Page 90]
both parties.30

A second example of the influence of Christian Zionists
in US politics was Congressman Jim Moran's March 2003
resignation from his position of House Democratic regional
whip. In the early weeks of the US-led invasion of Iraq,
Moran suggested that in the interest of Israel, the Jewish
lobby promoted the US-led invasion of Iraq.31
After Moran's statement, there was an immediate condemnation
by Jewish organisations and the State of Israel. These
groups also called for Moran's resignation. The Jewish
backlash was anticipated and Moran did not initially back
off from his comments, nor did he have any intention of
resigning from his post. However, in the ensuing days the
Christian Zionist leadership followed suit with rhetoric
similar to that of the Jewish organisations, and Moran soon
became ostracised from his party. Reverend Dr Paul Schenck,
a Christian Zionist, suggested that Moran's statement was a
gesture that was out of 'hatred for the Jewish people / by
those who harbor animosity to the apple of God's eye'.32
Due to the strong Christian Zionist backlash following his
statements, Moran would suffer a loss of confidence from his
party, which resulted in his resignation as regional whip.

Incidents such as this demonstrate that the Christian
Zionist lobby has established a pervasive influence in
Washington. As former State Department Deputy Director of
Counter Terrorism Terrell Arnold states (2004),
'Congressional hardening on the side of Israel is driven in
part by anger about the Palestinian suicide bombings, but
the main drivers are active lobbies for Israel, including
Jewish organizations in the United States and the
Christian-Right'.33

A third example relates to the US's endorsement of the
Roadmap. In Spring of 2003, President Bush stated his
commitment to establishing progress towards peace in the
Israeli-Palestinian crisis through the Middle East
Quartet-sponsored Roadmap. President Bush also pledged to
establish a democratic Palestinian state existing
side-by-side in harmony with Israel. President Bush and
Israeli Prime Minister Sharon publicly stated their vehement
opposition to a peace process progressing under President
Yasser Arafat's leadership.34
Under heavy international pressure the Palestinian [End
Page 91] Authority appointed Mahmoud Abbas as the first
Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority. With Arafat
under an Israeli-imposed house arrest, the appointment gave
Abbas de facto control over the political progress of
Palestine. In June 2003 the US acted as a third-party
mediator at a meeting between Sharon and Abbas in Aqaba,
Jordan. The meeting was a hurried attempt to initiate the
peace process and was largely symbolic with no tangible
gain. However, when President Bush affirmed his commitment
to the Roadmap shortly after the Aqaba meeting, a Christian
Zionist organisation, known as the Apostolic Congress,
mobilised its constituents to send a message to President
Bush:

[The] Apostolic Congress co-sponsored an
effort with the Jewish group Americans for a Safe Israel
that placed billboards in 23 cities with a quotation
from Genesis, žUnto thy offspring will I give this landÓ
and the message, žPray that President Bush Honors God's
Covenant with Israel. Call the White House with this
messageÓ. It then provided the White House phone number
and the Apostolic Congress's Web address. In the
interview with the Voice, Pastor Upton claimed personal
responsibility for directing 50,000 postcards to the
White House opposing the Road Map, which aims to create
a Palestinian state. 'I'm in total disagreement with any
form of Palestinian state', Upton said. 'Within a
two-week period, getting 50,000 postcards saying the
exact same thing from places all over the country; that
resonated with the White House, that really caused
[President Bush] to backpedal on the Road Map.35

After receiving these 50,000 postcards
and letters, the administration began to rethink the timing
of its Roadmap endorsement. It is alleged that the
Christian-Right's deep aversion to the Roadmap worried
President Bush's closest advisors and the administration
preferred not to apply any further pressure to the peace
process until after the 2004 Presidential elections.

A fourth example focuses on the US's excusal of Israel's
aerial assassinations of Palestinian faction leaders. In
June 2003, the Israeli Air Force attempted to assassinate
Hamas leader Dr 'Abdel Aziz Rantisi. In this botched
helicopter raid the Israelis killed six people, but Rantisi
escaped with non-life-threatening injuries. President Bush
initially condemned the attempted assassination stating that
the attack made fighting terrorism more difficult for the
newly-appointed Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas.36
Following this condemnation, the Christian Zionist
leadership in the US mobilised their constituents to send
thousands of e-mails to the White House protesting the
criticism. Notably, these emails consistently featured the
threat that if reprimands towards Israel continue, the
Christian-Right voting bloc will not appear on election-day.
It is said that within 24 hours [End Page 92] the
President's tone towards the attack had changed, and in
March 2004 when Israel assassinated Hamas' spiritual leader
Shaykh Ahmad Yassin, the US largely defended the action.37
It was clear that the Bush administration had not forgotten
the warnings received from its Christian Zionist
constituents only nine months prior. Without a negative
response from the US, Israel became more aggressive, and the
following month Dr Rantisi was assassinated. The US once
again defended Israel's use of force under the pretext of
fighting terror. Thus, the Christian Zionist lobby had
successfully cleared the way for Israel to commit targeted
assassinations on the leaders of the Palestinian movements.

Conclusions

The tragic irony of this alliance lies
in the diametrically opposed sentiment of Christian Zionists
and the remainder of the world. While much of the world
shamefully watched as Palestinians suffered through the
collective punishment of incursions and devastation,
Christian Zionists benightedly supported Israeli military
action and used their influence to extend it. It is apparent
that through the influence of the Christian Zionist lobby,
Israeli objectives can be achieved despite international law
and outcry. Despite studies and reports that have shown that
a majority of Israeli citizens would prefer disengaging from
West Bank settlements in exchange for peace, Christian
Zionists are among the most fanatical advocates for the
proliferation of settlements in the West Bank and increased
violence against Palestinians. However, Christian Zionism is
deaf to the desires of the people which its influence
impacts, and does not advocate measures of peace, but rather
it seeks the justification of all Israeli action under any
pretense and by any means necessary. The evidence presented
in this article reveals that while the Christian Zionist
lobby is thriving in its mission of advancing hawkish
Israeli interests, it is, in actuality, counterproductive to
Israel as it is detrimental to the prospect of peace. This
policy of violence and suffocation towards Palestinians
produces a dangerous byproduct, which will become evident
years from now. It breeds a new generation of hate among
Israelis and Palestinians because it exacerbates the already
dire humanitarian conditions in the Occupied Territories,
which result in the escalation of violence towards Israeli
and Palestinian civilians.

As Christian Zionists cling on to this notion of a
'chosen people', the results of this entwined relationship
spell disaster for Palestinians who have become the
forgotten victims of this alliance. However, the greater
motivation behind Christian Zionists' undying support is the
satisfaction of their [End Page 93] theological
outline. While Christian Zionists support Israel monetarily
and through influence, they have simultaneously
indoctrinated a notion among American Christians that we are
on the brink of the 'end-times', and God will soon
exterminate two-thirds of his chosen people. This belief is
inherently anti-Semitic and the actions of the Christian
Zionist movement are being carried out with the intent of
successfully attaining their theological prophecy, one that
spells disaster for the Jewish people. As the US works for
what it states is an 'evenhanded' approach to resolving the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the influence of the Christian
Zionist 'Armageddon Lobby' is actually ever greater in
shaping the US's 'honest broker' policy.

Footnotes

1. This
article is based on a graduate thesis written towards a
Master's degree in Government at Harvard University, which
was completed in 2005. I am indebted to Professor Paul D.
Hanson of Harvard University and Professor Saliba Sarsar of
Monmouth University for their useful comments on this
article.

28.
Resolution Refuting and Condemning the Statements concerning
Islam and the Prophet Muhammed Made by Rev. Jerry Falwell
on '60 Minutes', National Council of Churches, 7 October
2002.

29.
This attack occurred at a Seder dinner in Israel when a
suicide bomber detonated explosives on 27 March 2002,
killing 29.

30.
Based on visits to the web sites of four self-proclaimed
Christian Zionist organisations (American Values, Christians
for Israel, Stand for Israel, WorldNet Daily) followed by
visits to the web sites of four right-leaning Israeli
organisations (ADL, AIPAC, Ayn Rand Institute, Israel
Ministry of Foreign Affairs) (accessed on 10 June 2004).

Comment GuidelinesBe
succinct, constructive and relevant to the
story. We encourage engaging, diverse
and meaningful commentary. Do not include
personal information such as names,
addresses, phone numbers and emails.
Comments falling outside our guidelines –
those including personal attacks and
profanity – are not permitted.
See our complete Comment
Policy
anduse this link
to notify usif you have concerns about a comment.
We’ll
promptly review and remove any inappropriate
postings.

In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and
educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation
whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information
ClearingHouse endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)